Author’s Note: While
population agenda themes interlink with a myriad of other issues, such
as economics, development, education, and global governance, the purpose
of this article isn’t to examine each area of impact, nor the historical
context of the population control debate. Instead, it follows an
interlocking theme: a combination of environmentalism (and its politics)
and Earth-based spirituality — the utopian ideal of politics, religion,
and a lot less people.
This is the third article in
a multi-part series on New Age and political utopianism.
The first time I ever laid
eyes on America’s Stonehenge was late one spring evening. Caught in the
lights of my employer’s car, this remarkable monument seemed surreal in
the shadow-play cast by the car’s headlights. The next day, after
lodging in Elberton, Georgia, we went back to this complex modern-day
megalith for a closer look.
The Georgia Guidestones, a
massive granite edifice planted in the Georgia countryside, contains a
list of ten new commandments for Earth’s citizens. The first
commandment, and the one which concerns this article, simply states:
"Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature."
This population control
commandment reminded me of what I had witnessed back in 1997 while
attending the Global Citizenship 2000 Youth Congress. Held in Vancouver,
BC, the purpose of this event was to incite national changes to the
Canadian educational system; specifically, to instill Earth-centric
values through the adoption of Robert Muller’s World Core Curriculum
— a philosophy of education that incorporates global citizenship and
pantheistic concepts.1
Muller, a grandfatherly
figure with decades of United Nations’ experience, gave an emotionally
charged speech that strongly emphasized a global population control
agenda. In a dialogue between himself and Mother Earth (played by
himself!), Muller, as the Earth, challenged the participants towards a
new way of thinking,
What are you doing to me?
You have multiplied the number of beings on this planet from 2.5
billion in 1952 to 5.8 billion today. How could you do this to me?
This big population explosion all around the world, and I, the Earth,
am supposed to feed them. Why did you do this to me?… You are killing
me!2
To the attending youth and
educators, Muller boasted that the United Nations had, as a result of
warnings to the world, "prevented the birth of 2 billion, 200 million
people." Furthermore, he encouraged the Congress to "Try to convince
your people to reduce the number of children. This is one of the biggest
problems we have on this planet."3
Clearly, the heart-and-soul
of Muller’s population agenda revolved around a dual theme of
environmental degradation and a greater spiritual Earth-connection,
…behave correctly towards
the Earth…. You are not children of Canada, you are really living
units of the cosmos because the Earth is a cosmic phenomena… we are
all cosmic units. This is why religions tell you, you are divine. We
are divine energy… it is in your hands whether evolution on this
planet continues or not.4
Not surprisingly, this
interlocking three-way theme — population, environment, and spirituality
— can be found in the literature of one of the most influential
environmental policy organizations in the world, the International
Institute for Sustainable Development [IISD].
In a 1995 text published by
the IISD titled Empowerment For Sustainable Development: Toward
Operational Strategies, the writers (the book is a compilation of
papers presented at a conference) detail the links between population
management, sustainable development, and religious values:
The concept [of sustainable
development] is also generally viewed as requiring major societal
changes through radical or incremental restructuring of institutions
and management approaches. For example, a paradigm shift is envisaged
towards a decentralized society characterized by small-scale, labour-intensive
enterprises, local autonomy, diversity of cultures and thinning out of
population over landscape. A more forceful and dynamic role for
religious and cultural groups to advocate principles of environmental
protection has been urged.5
Management — this is the
operational point of planned population shifts ("thinning out of
population" certainly demonstrates this concept). And a major component
of this management process towards environmental/population mind-change
is education. After all, by altering the minds of the next generation,
long-term target goals are advanced pupil-by-pupil.
Empowerment For Sustainable
Development notes,
Education has been advanced
as significant in bringing about changes in attitudes, behaviour,
beliefs, and values… In order to redirect behaviour and values towards
institutional change for sustainable development there is a need to
investigate strategic options in relation to educational philosophies,
scope for propagation and adoption, and groups most likely to be
susceptible to change.6
Consider the First National
Environmental Teach-In, which was held on April 22, 1970 and which
sparked today’s annual Earth Day celebrations. For this nation-wide
event (held in the US), a special book was prepared to aid teachers and
students in their quest to live peacefully with the Earth. The follow
quotes, some quite lengthy, illustrates the managed changes in
"attitudes, behaviour, beliefs, and values" — and their impact on how to
think regarding environmental and population issues. Remember, this
text, titled The Environmental Handbook, was geared towards high
school students [my own high school used this as a textbook for many
years].
What we do about ecology
depends on our ideas of the man-nature relationship. More science and
more technology are not going to get us out of the present ecologic
crisis until we find a new religion, or rethink our old one.7
Both our present science
and our present technology are so tinctured with orthodox Christian
arrogance toward nature that no solution for our ecologic crisis can
be expected from them alone. Since the roots of our trouble are so
largely religious, the remedy must also be essentially religious,
whether we call it that or not. We must rethink and refeel our nature
and destiny.8
In a welfare state, how
shall we deal with the family, the religion, the race, or the class
(or indeed any distinguishable and cohesive group) that adopts
overbreeding as a policy to secure its own aggrandizement? To couple
the concept of freedom to breed with the belief that everyone born has
an equal right to the commons is to lock the world into a tragic
course of action.9
No technical solution can
rescue us from the misery of overpopulation. Freedom to breed will
bring ruin to all… The only way we can preserve and nurture other and
more precious freedoms is by relinquishing the freedom to breed, and
that very soon… it is the role of education to reveal to all the
necessity of abandoning the freedom to breed.10
A prerequisite to any
lasting solution to environmental pollution is a zero growth rate —
the birth rate equalling the death rate… The essential cause of
environmental pollution is over-population, combined with an excessive
population growth rate; other antipollution measures can be used
temporarily, but so long as the central problem is not solved, on can
expect no lasting success.11
So how do we deal with the
"pollution" problem of too many people? On page 291 of The
Environmental Handbook, it suggests that instead of giving gifts at
Christmas, you could send money to population control organizations such
as Zero Population Growth and Planned Parenthood/World Population.
It was further proposed that
educators could embed population issues into core subject areas,
Biology — Compare
elimination of predation and consequent overpopulation of animal
species (e.g. deer) with health advances followed by overpopulation of
human species… Discuss methods of contraception.
…Economics — Investigate
key to affluence… Compare rates of population growth. Growth of
various countries with rate of GNP growth; where former exceeds
latter, living standards declines.
English — Read (perhaps as
outside reading, with book reviews given in class) Malthus [author’s
note: Robert T. Malthus is the father of the science of population
control, he lived from 1766 to 1834], Ehrlich’s Population Bomb…
any of the Sierra Club’s Wilderness Conference books.
History (U.S.) — Consider
changing attitudes toward birth control…
History (World) — Trace
population growth in various areas of the world…
Mathematics — …Calculate
some of the horrors that will take place if breeding isn’t slowed…
Psychology — Study (perhaps
experiment with) effects of overcrowding…12
Other options were given in a
section titled "Suggestions Toward an Ecological Platform,"
Stabilizing the U.S.
population should be declared a national policy. Immediate steps
should be taken to:
1. Legalize voluntary
abortion and sterilization and provide these services free.
2. Remove all restrictions
on the provisions of birth control information and devices; provide
these services free to all, including minors.
3. Make sex education
available to all appropriate levels, stressing birth control practices
and the need to stabilize the population.
4. Launch a
government-sponsored campaign for population control in the media…
5. Offer annual bonuses for
couples remaining childless and eliminate tax deductions for more than
two children.
Control of world population
growth is simply a matter of survival of the human race. Federal
priorities must be made to reflect this fact. We propose:
1. Massive federal aid to
supply birth control information, planning and materials to all
countries that will accept it.
2. Foreign aid only to
countries with major programs to curb population growth.
3. Increased research on
birth control methods and on attitudes toward limiting births.13
Family life, too, was
targeted as a population concern. "Explore other social structures and
marriage forms, such as group marriage and polyandrous marriage… Share
the pleasure of raising children widely, so that all need not directly
reproduce….14
This is societal management
at its highest, and religion comes directly into play. According to
The Environmental Handbook, "…nothing short of total transformation
will do much good." So with that in mind, a list was given of
appropriate religions, spiritual traditions, and philosophies,
Let these be encouraged:
Gnostics, hip Marxists, Teilhard de Chardin Catholics, Druids,
Taoists, Biologists [author’s note: biologists may have been listed
because of the evolutionary principles underpinning much of modern day
biological science], Witches, Shamans, Bushmen, American Indians,
Polynesians, Anarchists, Alchemists… the list is long. All primitive
cultures, all communal and ashram movements.15
As the foundation for today’s
Earth Day events, the 1970 Environmental Handbook provided a
virtual roadmap for societal transformation. Since then, our educational
system, sciences, and political circles have been inundated with
population change agendas — be they in the guise of environmentalism,
alleviating world poverty, ensuring food security, responding to climate
change, or the enhancement of third world economies.16
Regardless of the reasons for
reducing the world’s population, the very idea of forcing humanity down
this road has spun all sorts of apocalyptic ideas. Bertrand Russell, one
of the last century’s most recognized philosophers, wholeheartedly
embraced mass depopulation as a necessary for securing a more unified
world.
I do not pretend that birth
control is the only way in which population can be kept from
increasing. There are others, which, one must suppose, opponents of
birth control would prefer. War, as I remarked a moment ago, has
hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps
bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could
be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors
could procreate freely without making the world too full. There would
be nothing in this to offend the consciences of the devout or to
restrain the ambitions of nationalists. The state of affairs might be
somewhat unpleasant, but what of this? Really high-minded people are
indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s.17
As ugly as Russell’s model
appears, it resonates with a certain segment of the population control
community. In 1968, Paul Ehrlich wrote that, "We must rapidly bring the
world population under control, reducing the growth rate to zero or
making it go negative."18
His suggestions seem tame by comparison to Russell’s ideas, but "making"
a population "go negative" carries with it some amazing connotations.
The Environmental Handbook
also suggests a radical cut in human numbers.
Situation. There are
now too many human beings, and the problem is growing rapidly worse.
It is potentially disastrous not only for the human race but for most
other life forms. Goal. The goal would be half of the present
world population, or less.19
Cutting the world’s numbers
in half is not "population control" — it’s mass extermination.
In 1998 I was a subscriber to
the Progressive Population Network listserver, an online community of
environmentalists and population control advocates. One posting, a short
note written by a lady named Joan, offered a glimpse into Russell’s
version of population control [author’s note: I have intentionally left
off Joan’s last name],
Humans had to thin a heard
[sic] of deer by shooting them because the natural mechanisms
(probably wolves) for keeping the deer population in check had been
disrupted. So instead of shooting humans to "thin" us, lets find the
natural mechanisms for keeping human populations in check. Otherwise
people will just keep breeding and we’ll just have to keep shooting
them. And that’s just too icky for me.
Since there is no
equivalent to wolves for humans, one idea would be to just stop
providing food and medicine to people who out-breed their habitat. Let
them make the choice between starving or limiting their procreation.
People need to see more clearly the connection between their
reproductive habits and the destruction of the environment.20
We’ve come around to a point
in our society that in striving to "save the Earth" we’re proclaiming
humanity’s suicide. Is this the logical end-run of the great
Earth-first, New Age dream?
Notes:
1
